Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, J. - (1.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that penalty has been imposed upon the petitioner under Section 72(6) of the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for the sake of brevity hereinafter referred to as the "Act. 2005") to be read with Rule 42 of the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Rules, 2006. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that an order at Annexure -4 dated 3rd April, 2015 imposing penalty of Rs. 85,322/ - is under challenge. Before learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argues in detail, it is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the said impugned order is appealable under Section 79 of the Act, 2005 before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Hazaribagh Division, Hazaribagh. Similarly, there is efficacious alternative remedy available under Section 80 of the Act, 2005 and, hence, this writ petition may not be entertained by this Court, at this stage. Otherwise also, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that he is ready and willing to argue out the case on merits and there is no case of the petitioner, even on merits.
(2.) HAVING heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the impugned order dated 3rd April, 2015, which is at Annexure -4 to the memo of this writ petition, it appears that the same is appealable under Section 79 of the Act, 2005 and even revision application is also tenable under Section 80 of the Act, 2005. In view of these facts, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition when efficacious alternative remedy is available with the petitioner. Thus without entering into the merits of the case at this stage, this writ petition is, hereby, dismissed. Liberty is reserved with the petitioner to avail the efficacious alternative remedy available under the Act, 2005, as stated hereinabove.;